*Yes I know alcohol is a drug, I’m going with popular use.
Anyway in several discussions I’ve had I’ve raised the issue of so called functional addicts, those addicted to alcohol and drugs who manage to lead rather ordinary lives in opposition to the stereotype. I always seem to run up against some version of No True Scotsman.
1.Denial is a stage of addiction, and it lasts different lengths of time in different addicts. In some people they never leave denial and die still in it, which is what so called functional addicts are stuck in. They simply have not realized yet, and never may, how damaging their addiction is. Or that they had simply not progressed to the non-functional stage of addiction, which some people never do.
2.Such people are not “really” drug addicts, just dependent. Being a drug addict by definition means you are not functional, so someone functional is not in that group.
Here addict seems to be more like a personality disorder rather than an inability to function without a substance.
The problem I have with these ideas is that if you define it this way of course every addict/alcoholic is a rampaging hurricane of disaster. I especially enjoy the idea that even someone functional to the grave just never got the chance to go wild but they eventually would have, like saying all men are rapists just some die before they get the chance to strike.:smack:
EDIT:I’m not talking about those physically dependent on a drug due to medical treatment.
I’m sure most “functioning addicts” are completely aware of just how damaging their addictions are. If they weren’t, they wouldn’t go to such lengths to hide their problems.
It’s because the definition of an alcoholic is someone who can’t control his or her drinking. If you can’t do so, that pretty much makes you an alcoholic. Granted that’s a very simplistic way of putting it, but if you’re incapable of doing something in moderation, that would make you an addict.
You wouldn’t say it’s a “no true Scotsman” if you say, “A Scotsman is a guy from Scotland”, would you? I think that’s kinda the point.
That being said, it’s not always easy to determine if you’re a full-blown alcoholic, or someone with a drinking problem who isn’t quite gotten there yet. (You don’t have a problem abstaining, but you when you DO drink, you can’t do so in moderation).
Addiction is a mental disorder, so it’s not always easy to diagnose. (Sadly, I’ve seen a LOT of it in my family)
If you look at the history of AA, there is absolutely “no true Scotsman” thinking, and it’s pretty explicit. It was thought that AA would only work on people who had suffered real consequences; these people were considered “real alcoholics”. Others who had not suffered such consequences weren’t taken seriously because they weren’t “real alcoholics”; they were left to twist for a while until their situations became a little more dire. Even today, there are people who are told that they haven’t hit bottom yet and should come back when they have. People who, for whatever reason, drink heavily for a time and attend AA meetings, then leave AA and resume moderate drinking are regarded as not being “real alcoholics”. It’s just part of the culture of the organization.
Mind you, one of the principles behind AA originally was that it was designed to meet the needs of people virtually on the verge of dying due to their alcoholism. It was only later that it became a one size fits all treatment for anyone abusing alcohol. Even many of the proponents of AA would not have been accepted by the original brand of AA.
I recall from my days working in drug and alcohol counselling the disdain that heavy users of alcohol and drugs had for their “weekend warrior” group mates.
Speaking as somone who has “done the hiding”, with alcohol and other less socially acceptable (yet less harmful) drugs, my thought process was all about stopping people from judging me negatively - I wasn’t interested in hiding the evidence of consumption per se.
Put another way, I wasn’t deluding myself about drinking shitloads. And if someone didn’t mention or complain about me drinking shitloads, I wouldn’t hide it from them. It was only those who would nag me (or worse) in some way about what I was doing that I would hide my behaviour from.
I suspect it’s the same for most addicts (although I don’t think I was ever addicted to alcohol [certainly was and frankly am to opiates, although now my opiates are legitimately prescribed]) - they only hide their consumption because people complain about it. And I don’t really see how that is a useful diagnostic. It would make a 25 year old grad student drinking shitloads constantly, but openly amongst his or her peers not an alcoholic, while a 25 year old trainee baptist priest who was hiding a couple of drinks a month from his co religionists problamatic.
Obviously across an entire population the criteria are useful because the more you drink, the more will judge you, and the more you will hide it. But it’s a statistic that REALLY needs evaluating depending upon the person.
You’d be surprised how much denial there is in both the alcoholic and his family members/friends/employers. The fact that he hasn’t lost anything will often lead to rationalization that his drinking isn’t a problem at all because he’s still got his family/friends/job and that only “real alcoholics” have lost their family/friends/jobs. The family/friends/employers can rationalize the drinker’s behavior and drinking because he’s still got his job/house/stuff/health and so he can’t be a “real alcoholic” because those people don’t have those things. Meanwhile, he’s still drinking heavily, he’s just better able to fit it in to his day-to-day life. And as long as he does that, there’s no reason to get help.
In fact, I’ve known many “functional” alcoholics whose drinking was fairly overt because of this denial. Denial basically means that you see it, but you don’t see it, you know what I mean?
I could have phrased it more accurately; this is what happens before I have sufficient coffee.
It may be what looks like fitting drinking into daily life is really fitting day-to-day life into drinking. Some of my Al-Anon friends have stories of the drinkers in their lives who would consistently choose after-work happy hours or other social drinking activities over activities that did not involve drinking, or over family activities; who would spend money they couldn’t really afford to maintain appearances at the bar; or who would choose career paths because of the acceptability of drinking. These behaviors are easy enough to rationalize, and by all appearances, the drinker may be perfectly “functional”, but they do have consequences, especially when the various obligations aren’t met because of the fact that the drinker’s life revolves around alcohol.
In all fairness, those activities that don’t involve drinking or family activities often suck.
The US takes a very schizophrenic attitude towards drinking:
Schools have D.A.R.E. programs and whatnot to teach kids the “evils” of sex, drugs and alchohol. But at the same time, popular culture potrays high school and college as a time where excessive sex, drugs and alchohol are just part of “coming of age”.
Showing up work drunk or hungover is considered being an irresponsible employee. But companies routinely have sponsored happy hours and I can’t even tell you how many “meetings” I’ve had with senior managers or clients in some restaurant, bar, lounge or strip club.
Drinking is such an ingrained part of our culture that I think it’s difficult to distinguish between “hey he’s a fun guy who likes to party!” and “I think he has a bit of a problem”
If that’s really your attitude, I’d suggest revising it. If you really can’t hang out with other people without a drink in your hand, there’s a problem. I don’t have much of a sense of humor about this because I’ve experienced the damage it causes firsthand. And this behavior came from a “functioning” alcoholic.
I agree with you there. DARE doesn’t work as a prevention strategy largely because of the puritanical attitude. But at the same time, I didn’t see much excess when I went to college. And I went to a “party” school.
Going to the occasional happy hour is one thing. Going to most or all of them, and convincing yourself and the other people in your life that they’re necessary is another, and that’s the kind of thing I’m talking about. It’s the pattern of behavior, not individual occurrences. And, yes, it’s perfectly possible to be the life of the party and still be irresponsible. Just ask the asshole who decides that the party is license to sexually harass co-workers, or the idiot who gets arrested for DUI after leaving the party.
Look. I’m not opposed to drinking. I’m not even saying that companies shouldn’t sponsor such events. What I am saying is that it’s possible for a person to fit his life around drinking, and that that can be a problem if he does that to the exclusion of other obligations.
I actually saw a lot of excess at college. Without boring you with the details, kids at my school developed a work hard / play hard attitude that often carried well into their 20s and 30s. Almost like something out of a Bret Easton Ellis novel. After awhile it just seems like how people are.
I think the problem is that there is a lot of life you can miss out on if your entire focus is on drinking and partying.
Not everyone with a drinking problem, per se, is an alcoholic. You could just be someone who doesn’t know when to quit when you drink, but you’re not necessarily addicted, and you could do without it, no problem. You’re not an addict then – but if you don’t do something, you’re probably heading down that path. Or you could learn to drink in moderation – if you stop yourself in time. But I think once you’ve hit a certain point, there’s no turning back.
The problem is, where is that point? It’s not the same for everyone. No one sets out to be an addict. And those that are are usually in denial – “I can quit any time I want, I don’t have a problem, I’m not drunk, etc”. They probably know, in the back of their minds, they DO have a problem – but they’re not willing to admit to it.
Or you have someone who’s so far gone and really just doesn’t give a shit.
One problem is telling the difference between someone controlling thier drinking and someone in denial isn’t so easy from the outside, and from the inside too at times. It only gets clearer over time when things either deteriorate or they don’t.
